linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] convert semaphore to mutex in struct class

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a8e1da0801082237x37d2a56eqee6db19017499dbc@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:37:22 +0800
From:	"Dave Young" <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
To:	"Greg KH" <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	"Stefan Richter" <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
	dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	a.zummo@...ertech.it, peterz@...radead.org, cbou@...l.ru,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"David Brownell" <david-b@...bell.net>, krh@...hat.com,
	stern@...land.harvard.edu, rtc-linux@...glegroups.com,
	spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, jarkao2@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] convert semaphore to mutex in struct class

On Jan 9, 2008 2:13 PM, Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:32:48AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > On Jan 9, 2008 6:48 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 03:05:10PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > > > On Jan 8, 2008 1:20 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de> wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 06:13:37PM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
> > > > > > It's already in the driver core to the most part.  It remains to be seen
> > > > > > what is less complicated in the end:  Transparent mutex-protected list
> > > > > > accesses provided by driver core (requires the iterator), or all the
> > > > > > necessary locking done by the drivers themselves (requires some more
> > > > > > lock-taking but perhaps fewer lock instances overall in the drivers, and
> > > > > > respective redefinitions and documentation of the driver core API).
> > > > >
> > > > > I favor changing the driver core api and doing this kind of thing there.
> > > > > It keeps the drivers simpler and should hopefully make their lives
> > > > > easier.
> > > >
> > > > What about this?
> > > >
> > > > #define class_for_each_dev(pos, head, member) \
> > > >         for (mutex_lock(&(container_of(head, struct class, devices))->mutex), po
> > > > s = list_entry((head)->next, typeof(*pos), member); \
> > > >         prefetch(pos->member.next), &pos->member != (head) ? 1 : (mutex_unlock(&
> > > > (container_of(head, struct class, devices))->mutex), 0); \
> > > >         pos = list_entry(pos->member.next, typeof(*pos), member))
> > >
> > I'm wrong, it's same as before indeed.
> >
> > > Eeek, just make the thing a function please, where you pass the iterator
> > > function in, like the driver core has (driver_for_each_device)
> >
> > Ok, so need a new member of knode_class, I will update the patch later.
> > Thanks.
>
> Withdraw my post, sorry :)
>
> For now the mutex patch, I will only use the mutex to lock the devices list and write an iterater function.
> Most of the iterating is for finding some device in the list, so maybe need a match function just like drivers do?
>

Drop one more mail address of David Brownell in cc list.
Sorry for this, david
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/